It’s encouraging to be approached by an increasing number of recruitment firms and corporate recruitment teams asking for guidance on how to improve/ramp-up their presence on professional and online social networks such as LinkedIn and Facebook.
With the risk of stopping them in their tracks, I normally include in this conversation a question or two about their own websites; I enquire if they measure their traffic, if they know how their sites renders on a smartphone and how regularly they update content, jobs, etc.
Sometimes I can feel in the voice of these potential customers a level of disappointment, so as to say “no, no; don’t get off topic, I don’t want to talk about my site; focus on the question about networks”
Like I said, it’s encouraging. It reflects that recruiters are aware that they need to go where job seekers and clients live, research, find.
Maybe it was the lack of caffeine today, but all I could come up with trying to explain why I ask those seemingly off-putting questions about their own website, was the following social dating scenario:
Imagine an online network is a funky, fashionable bar: nice music, lots of great-looking people mingling, checking each other out.
You are there too with shiny new clothes and accessories (company page, personal profile), already with a few acquaintances know you from previous meet-ups (connections), checking people out and being checked out.
Suddenly across the room, you see someone that really grabs your attention with their presence and persona (awesome profile – 100% complete, premium membership, open networker, looking for a career change). Fantastic!
At that moment, you come onto this person’s focus too; you’re the right complement: great connections, work for an awesome agency, and you’re hiring for this great company.
It’s a match. It’s late however: the bar will close eventually, but you and your soul mate don’t want to leave, both of you want to know more of each other. You want to talk all night.
So you pop the question: “Do you want to come to my apartment?”
At that moment (hopefully before you mutter the words) you may have thought: In which condition will this person find my abode? When did I last vacuum? Is there more than stale milk in the fridge?
You know where I am going.
If you effectively engage potential candidates or customers on a professional/social network, and they are keen enough to accept your invitation to your apartment (your company website); What they find there? Will this more intimate environment help you grow closer to this person, or will he/she be putt-off because your place is not as shiny as you appeared on the bar?
I say it again, more than happy to assist people to dress up and look fab in preparation to go to this huge online bar; just let me ask you in which condition you left your apartment.
Happy Oz Day everyone!!

It seemed that the recently reworked Myspace logo was fairly prescient of what was coming for the company in early 2011. The new owners will only have to plug in their own logo in the blank.
If I remember well, News bought it for about 600 milllion 6 years ago, whilst at the same time striking the advertising deal with Google which would effectively fund the acquisition. It would appear that either that has been achieved and then there’s residual value to be ‘bagsed’, or the math is not looking like it will add any time soon.
I am not confident the user base will be patient enough for a Myspace redux, unless it blows their socks off with a new (and I mean a NEW) proposition.
[logo linked from networkeffect]
I was pretty sure I had not bought any virtual goods; I’d rather give a real bunch to the missus instead of getting her a one-dimensional rose on Facebook. Heck I might lose my face if I show with my byte-based present.
I caught a bit of the first day of @leweb a couple of days ago. During the time I watched it was all about games, mobile, social and payments. I won’t be surprised if that’s how it went for the rest of the sessions.
Fact is, I might be the only old-f@art not buying virtual goods. Billions of dollars have exchanged hands, and many companies have become hugely profitable off the back of these ethereal goods. And they all seem to get even stronger sale/expansion outlooks.
Thing is, I think there is a more comprehensive of virtual goods when I said I had not bought any yet.
If you think of software as a virtual good – whether it is a spreadsheet, a smartphone game, or an iTunes track – I guess this means we’re in this virtual commerce exchange for a long time now. The distinctive feature of these goods is that they have intellectual inputs that ‘impact’ the purchaser or recipient. The problem with my earlier definition was that I did not see intellectual inputs on electronic cows (which are totally different to electric sheep, but I digress).
Hopefully, you have agreed with this revised definition of virtual goods and with the fact that you and I have been supporting this economy for yonks. Let me put something else on top of that:
Physical goods – computers, jeans, coffee – have virtual goods in their make up that appeases or satisfy us emotionally, over and above the fact that the computer is fast, that those jeans hold your butt beautifully, or that the coffee is going to wake you up.
I put to you that those virtual goods are encapsulated in what we call ‘brand’. The implicit assumption is that, perhaps over time, you can find the physical features of branded (and great) goods in other white label products. Manufacturing technology, design progress and Japan seem to indicate this is rather plausible.
That was a bit of a long road to assert that the virtual elements of your product/service have the potential to be the source of customer engagement with them.
Where are our virtual goods in recruitment? How do agencies and hiring organisations build in virtual goods that make clients and job seekers react emotionally in their favour?
I guess as an industry we don’t invest sufficiently in these virtual goods. It might be worthwhile considering investing in them as these could be a tangible part of what you call your differentiators.
What will it take for you to consider investment in your virtual goods? Money? Better understanding?
If you leave an insightful comment I will send you recommendation to be an honorary member of Pet Society.
Have a good weekend
I am always a bit sceptical about news of studies regarding perceptions and attitudes about the mature workforce like the one that got published recently.
Don’t get me wrong; if the findings indicate a true change of practice regarding older workers, that’s great.
I mean it’s in everyone’s best interest, right? Sooner or later – if we’re lucky – we’re moving up the age bracket whilst staying functional.
Whether we’re bosses or employees, we’re always selling our professionalism, experience and potential. Fact remains, the perception of our effectiveness as salespeople is impacted by how wrinkled we look.
How do we change these perceptions? How do we become grey hair impervious?
All of us have a to-do. Owners, managers and workers young and old need to nremain ‘responsible’.
1. employees, ensure you’re not mis-cast. There will be a temptation to take on a job that may not be a strength to you, but your potential employer is going to say ‘come on mate, you’re experienced, you can do this job’. if you know that is not the case, don’t accept it. It will come back to haunt you.
2. employers, just because some people have been on the workforce for thirty years, it guarantees you nothin’. There are people who are shit workers in their 20′s and they don’t learn, skill up or gain insights, and in their 50′s they remain shit workers. Leave the affirmative action stuff, don’t hire off the back of the wise-older worker preconception, and interview and test as if you want the job done the best possible way.
3. employees stay hungry. No-one wants lazy fat cats in their teams, however young or old. Show that you want the job, that you want to do well, that you want to become a linchpin of the organisation (here goes Seth Godin again). Stamina changes should not impact on your attitude.
4. employers, situational leadership won’t go astray across all your teams.There are certainly different motivators per staff member; don’t manage generational groups. Manage individuals.
Bye
12-10-2010 Update: Good stats and thoughts from Ross Clennett
How good was I? This is a post from ’07
Lazy post, but need to get some momentum going.
Have a good rest of the week.
With “Linchpin”, Seth Godin has hit the mark as far as conveying a message that resonates with employers, employees, the self-employed, the entrepreneur: work is art in as much as it is a process filled with generosity provided by individuals that create, connect, produce; and ultimately has an effect on others.
Perhaps the book’s punch comes from the fact that the metaphors and actual advice avoid the usual career advice gaff and aims to engage the reader at the emotional level that is required to be an effective worker, as opposed to a ‘steady job holder’.
This post – the first in more than a few months – is direct result of his pep-write: I’ve been too busy to “ship” (deliver, produce, think, give). I had great excuses: I am dedicating a lot of time to other projects including Digital Reach, and I had ruined the original template of this blog (it still is as you can see), so I did not want too many visitors.
I am getting out there again: selling, writing, consulting, pushing the things I stand for; which as you know it’s double-shit scary. Double because you can fail, which makes you feel you want to go hide under a rock and never come out; or you succeed, which means you have to get tense again and deliver so that your client is happy to pay the bill you sent them and then want to come back for some more.
Obviously if you dislike Godin, this will likely not be the book to make you a convert. It’s more of the same, perhaps sharper than ever, less sympathetic and with a desire to shake the ‘factory worker’ mindset and bring out the unruly genius in all of us.
If you get to it, let me know what were your impressions.
Have a great rest of the week
It’s the beginning of the year and I am already disappointed.
I thought 2010 was going to be the year where significantly less job ads, print or online, were going to include phrases like:
- ‘leading multinational’ to refer to the hiring company
- ‘high calibre individual’ to refer to the candidate they want to attract
- ‘challenging and dynamic environment’ to describe work conditions
What’s the real chance to get who you really want for this role with ‘details’ like those above?
I understand the anonymity has been used to protect clients from ambulance chasers, unsolicited CV’s etc. Those protection costs though are extremely high. It will cost real money to process unsuitable applicants – for example.
You might find the right individual in that hay stack you are generating. But just in case, get your calculator out and do your numbers; your job ads might be making your advertising/sourcing process more expensive than what you imagine.
Maybe…
In a recent post, @greg_savage reported that he had asked attendees of an RCSA event/roadshow for a quick show of hands about social tools usage. The results:
a) 80% of recruiters have a LinkedIn account, whilst only 20% were using it ‘actively’
b) there was a very low take up of twitter (5-10% have a handle)
You know what? If there were more ‘active’ recruiters on LinkedIn, or more consultants moving into twitter, the ‘damage’ might be even bigger.
What damage?
I went to @coffeemornings last Friday; I spoke to four peeps that had been approached by recruiters on LinkedIn that they had not heard from – let alone met – before; these peeps ranted about these recruiters effectively cold calling them, to either connect and then be referred to other LinkedIn members, or do the usual tyre-kicking (you happy in your job? kinda thing).
Some recruiters are using new(er) tools and combining them with old practices and old thinking. Big risk.
And big opportunities.
Recruiters that notice that LinkedIn is not a resume database or a Yellow Pages for candidates, will score; they will give themselves room to develop their brand as individual professionals and that of the firms the happen to be working for.
Recruiters that feel the disconnect between social tools and the ‘let’s put bums on seats’ way of recruitment, and are courageous enough to re-energise their practices in the eyes of clients and job seekers, will come on top.
Big risk. Big opportunities.

Wow, the previous blog entry I made was in March; don’t think I’ve ever left it for so long.
I think – like others – I was sorta kidnapped by Twitter; meantime though a number of things happened in regards to the LatinOcean practice. Allow me to make a recap:
1. Despite the GFC (remember it?) there were a quite a few clients keen to make investments in their staff education, reviewing processes and sprucing up internal and external systems. They were able to take advantage of their revised/lower opportunity costs (e.g. consultants less busy, more negotiation power with vendors, etc.).
2. What also helped us keep a steady path re. ‘business coming in’ was the expected growth of career management and transitioning/outplacement services from our larger clients. To leverage of this part of the cycle, we adapted our sourcing and recruitment focused offerings into the services from HR outfits that were preparing retrenched professionals for their next move. Our contribution had a lot to do with personal branding and reputation management on the web.
3. At the end of June, LatinOcean was sold to Jabor Holdings. Jabor Holdings is a private company in which I am a director. Our expectation is that LatinOcean will continue operating for as long as our customers want us around. If anything, we plan to explore how we can use the materials and IP developed over the last three years to expand into other professional services verticals.
4. Jabor Holdings is also owner of Digital Reach a new venture that came to life at the beginning of this year; focused on the online advertising industry, this startup needs lots of love and nurturing which is what hopefully we will be giving it.
This post is making me look back and now I understand why I haven’t blogged in such a long time.
In the meantime though, there have been interesting/encouraging topics/trends emerging; on which I can only hope I will be chipping in more proactively. For example:
- Less observers and more doers online; in particular more actual recruitment consultants walking the talk re. online sourcing, etc. and bringing insights from the real world. Greg Savage and Kelly O’Shaughnessy come to mind.
- The ever growing quality and volume output coming from the thinkers. The discourse and reports like Phillip and Michael’s sources of talent study opened the room for debate, discussion and further refinement outside the echo chamber.
- The ongoing tinkering with services and technologies supporting recruitment, sourcing, engagement
- The social recruitment meme, which was undergoing a stylish discussion entanglement until someone looked at the time and said that it was time to get back to work (just being facetious; I am always keen to listen and contribute to concept-shaping views on this topic)
Look forward to getting back into blogging shape. Thank you for sticking around
